Deardorff 8x10 vs. Sinar X 4x5: Techniques in Use

[Capocheny]

Season's Greetings All,

I've been using a Sinar X 4x5 over the past couple of years and am tossing the idea of getting a Dorff 8x10. What I was wondering is the following questions:

1. Are the techniques similar or vastly different in using the Sinar X and the Dorff? For example, focusing for the far and tilting to get the near into focus...

Any other similarities or differences in techniques that you can apprise me of? Any speed traps that I should avoid or be on the look-out for?

2. I'm assuming that the 210 F5.6 Sironar-N that I've been using for the 4x5 won't have sufficient covering power for the 8x10. Am I correct in this assumption?

3. I also have a 240 F5.6 Symmar-S and a 360 F6.8 Symmar-S.... would these be useable on the 8x10? Lastly, both the 240 and 360 are fairly heavy and sizeable pieces of glass. Does anyone currently use these lenses (if coverage is sufficient) on their 8x10 Dorff? I believe the boards for the Dorff I'm considering is a 6x6 in size... I'm concerned about these lenses being too big and heavy for the boards and, therefore, the camera.

The majority of my shooting will be with the 4x5 conversion back and the subject matter will predominantly be table-top, still-life, shots. However, there may be times where I'd like to experiment with 8x10.

Thanks for any information...

Wishing you all a very happy and fun holiday season.... and a health, prosperous and safe 2005!

Cheers

[Jim Rhoades]

#1. Focusing is the same

#3. The 240 and 360 is fine. As long as your willing to carry them.

#2. I believe your "N" is rated for 301mm. Not really enough. It would be wonderful for 4x10 or 5x8. The back of the Dorff has slots with leaf springs to insert dividers. That's three cameras in one. If it does not come with the dividers they are easy to make.

[Donald Hutton]

Doesn't the Sinar X have assymetrical movements on the rear standard? Which would make focussing the 'Dorff potentially a lot different.

[Gem Singer]

Hi Henry,

If you are contemplating getting rid of the Sinar and using an 8x10 Deardorff with a 4x5 reducing back, instead of your Sinar monorail. I suggest that you think about keeping both cameras, considering the type of photograpy you are doing.

You can find many discussions in the archives about using a wooden flat bed folding field camera, such as the Dorff, to do tabletop still-life photography. An 8x10 Dorff, with a 4x5 reducing back, may be able to get the job done, but it would be far from the the ideal tool to use for that type of work. The limited movement capability of a flatbed field camera, as well as the increased weight and bulk of the 8x10 format would be limiting. You will probably need a larger, stronger, tripod and head than the one you are using for your Sinar.

A wooden 8x10 Deardorff field camera, with a 4x5 reducing back, is a fine piece of equipment to use. However, it was not meant to be a substitute for a 4x5 monorail, under studio conditions.

[steve simmons]

Why would you want to use an 8x10 with a 4x5 reducing back when you already have a 4x5? IMHO you re making your life hader than necessary.
The 240 and 360 will be fine and although they are bigger than some siilar lenses have been used on Deardorffs for years utdoors and in the studio. The 210 probably as a little more coverage than listed and might work for scenes clser than infinity. The focussing will be a little different. The Sinar is assymetrical and the Deardorff is a base tilt. A little practice and you will figure out the difference.

steve simmons

[Ralph Barker]

Like the others who have responded, I wouldn't see the 'Dorff with reducing back as a substitute for your Sinar 4x5 in the studio. But, I do find having a 4x5 reducing back for my 8x10 Tachihara nice in the field, with landscapes and such. The only drawback is that wide lenses can't be focused at infinity - too much bellows, even fully-compressed. Thus, I'm limited to 150mm and above with the 4x5 reducing back on the Tachi.

[Scott Rosenberg]

henry...

if the majority of the work you will be doing with this camera is table-top & still life, then why would you consider replacing the sinar for the dorff? you have already matched the tool to the job with the sinar. if i was going to do mostly off-road driving, but occasionally wanted to drop the top on my car, i wouldn't sell my truck for a small convertable.

consider picking up an older, less expensive 8x10 (Improved Seneca, Kodak 2d, Calumet C-1, etc) for the odd time when you want to experiment with 8x10. if you find you are using the 8x10 camera more than the sinar, and it's not limiting in your table-top work, then you could always sell the older 8x10 for a newer one. jim at midwest usually has a few older 8x10's on hand, usually with new bellows.

if table-top and still life is what you're going to be doing most, you'd be doing something of a disservice to yourself by replacing the sinar with a dorff.

[Capocheny]

Greetings,

Thanks to all of you for responding to my questions. It's greatly appreciated...

Don,

You're quite correct... the Sinar X is assymetrical. Would you kindly expound on the differences with regards to focussing?

Eugene,

Thanks... I'll have to go through the archives and do some reading. The Sinar X is one heavy beast and is currently mounted on a studio stand with a Bogen geared head. I also have one of those Majestic pods for field use... this is what I would use for the 8x10 in the field. Admittedly, I've not had the pleasure of handling a Dorff 8x10 yet... but are they really that much heavier than an X or P2?

Steve,

The reason I'm considering the Dorff is that I'd like to take it out into the field occasionally. At other times, I'd like to do an 8x10 for contact prints. In the studio, unless I specifically want to use the 8x10 for some reason, I would most likely continue using the X for my table-top shooting. Sorry, I should have said that in my initial posting.

Scott,

I wasn't considering selling off my X but would like to experiment a little bit with 8x10. You're absolutely right that I'd be doing a disservice to myself if that were my ultimate goal.

The X is one heavy beast and, although I haven't taken it out into the field, I'd like to do some landscape shooting in a larger format size. Therefore, your suggestion makes sense. Perhaps, an updated Kodak 2D wouldn't be such a bad idea. But, this Dorff came up and I was toying with the idea.

The other negative to this particular camera, though, is that it's a pre-1950 and. therefore, it doesn't have front swing capabilities. I know there's a way around this but it might make more sense to find one that has front swing...

Again, thanks for all your great responses.

Cheers

[Gem Singer]

Hello again Henry,

It's not only a matter of weight, but also bulk. However, your Majestic tripod should be capable of handling the weight of just about any 8x10. With no front swing capability, you would need to turn the camera on it's side for quite a few outdoor shots. That can become old very quickly. Although that camera would probably work fine for simple tabletop shots, it would be impractical to use outdoors. Since it does not have front swing, you would be wise to pass on this particular Dorff, and keep on looking for a nicer one. Good luck.

[Donald Hutton]

Henry

Assymetrical movements allow much faster focussing. Cameras with either axis or base tilt (like the 'Dorff) rely on the user doing a whole lot of iterations of "focus/tilt/focus/tilt" to get the focus precise. In fact one should use a different technique for axis and base tilts (one (base tilts) you focus on the furthest required sharp object and then tilt to obtain near focus - X many iterations to get to the correct point, the other you focus near and tilt far). With either method a series of iterations are almost always required to get focus accpetable. However, with assymetric tilts, you simply focus on the axis line about 1/3 of the way up the ground glass and simply tilt until everthing miraculously jumps into focus at the same time - usually, there are no repetitions necessary - it all happens the first time. With axis or base tilts, this is almost never the case. However, it takes just a little practice and you will be able to focus with axis or base tilts pretty quickly too. In my experience, though, it's never as quick as assymetric tilts.